Backport fs added: info #7679
Closed
Backport fs added: info #7679
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
addaleax
added
doc
MylesBorins
force-pushed
the
v4.x-staging
branch
from
fcdb93d to
27222f4
Compare
|
Maybe include #7299 too? |
addaleax
force-pushed
the
backport-added-fs
branch
from
b85230e to
23e1fd8
Compare
Add 'close' event to doc/api/fs.md --> fs.ReadStream Add 'close' event to doc/api/fs.md --> fs.WriteStream Add 'close event to doc/api/stream.md --> stream.Writable From squashed history: Add 'close' event to stream.Writable per Issue nodejs#6484 Add #### prefix to Event: 'close' and backticks to 'close' similar to stream.Readable event: 'close' section Add more specifics to 'close' events for fs.ReadStream and fs.WriteStream Fix/Changed 'close' event from 'fs.ReadStream' to 'fs.WriteStream' wrapped long lines at 80 chars, reworded per Issue nodejs#6484 including the 'close' event as optional add 'close' event as optional in stream.Readable per issue nodejs#6484 doc: Add 'close' events to fs.ReadStream, 80char nit Fixes: nodejs#6484 PR-URL: nodejs#6499 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Brian White <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Robert Jefe Lindstaedt <[email protected]>
Ref: nodejs#6578 PR-URL: nodejs#6717 Reviewed-By: Robert Lindstaedt <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
fs.access and fs.accessSync were added to Node v0.11.15 via 2944934 PR-URL: nodejs#7299 Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <[email protected]> Ref: nodejs#6717 Ref: nodejs#6578
addaleax
force-pushed
the
backport-added-fs
branch
from
23e1fd8 to
cb8fae6
Compare
|
@richardlau Yup, done |
|
landed in 622929f...38330ca again sorry about the rebase mess :eek: |
|
@addaleax this one may have gotten messed up. Can you please confirm that there were only three commits that needed to get landed here? |
Those look perfectly correct to me. :) |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Backport #6499 + #6717 together to minimize conflicts. The former has been marked
dont-land-on-v4.xbut should generally be safe to backport.